What is art?
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /r9k/ - ROBOT9001
You are currently reading a thread in /r9k/ - ROBOT9001
What is art?
>Make something.
>Call it art.
It's now art.
>>24701432
Light in the universe has a speed limit. The reason why it does is to allow time to exist. Without time, everything in the universe would constantly interact with everything else instantly, and therefore everything would happen all at once and nothing would happen because nothing would have enough time to happen.
Art is what happens when you use the time that the universe has given you to examine life.
>>24701432
https://soundcloud.com/lobo_da_g/get-paid-prod-by-mbeats
my music is art
Broadly any product of human creativity, skill, artistic intent, etc.
That is how the word applies to language anyway, which is the argument retards get into, and your question was phrased in a retarded way by the way
Art is a measurement of value of differing types, thus "what is art" is meaningless, while "what is good art" is meaningful
Everything is art
Few things are worthwhile when held as artistic
Evangelion is art desu
>>24701661
TRUTH.PNG
>>24701432
Let me remember and possibly refine my old definition(s).
A sensory structure has
- artistic spirit insofar as it has been made with (1) aesthetic pleasure and (2) conceptual pleasure in mind.
- artistic merit insofar as it provokes (1) and (2) relatively to an audience.
(1) Aesthetic pleasure is provoking the neurological sense of beauty.
(2) Conceptual pleasure is provoking the sense of novelty with respect to its arrangement of concepts, such as techniques or referents (things being depicted or alluded to intellectually or emotionally).
More or less this. Open to further refinement.
>>24701845
Well said. Thank you.
>>24702001
No, I thank you.
'Novel arrangement' bears examples. Mona Lisa might display it through combining a very near first plane and a very distant, perspectival last plane -- if no one has done it before, then it gets 'it's new, but it makes sense' points. For my inability to think of better examples, cubists get it for proving that meaning can be conveyed just through a couple of strategically chosen points and angles, and not the whole figure/object. And on the other hand, for instance, Michelangelo or some other Renaissance sculptors might show it through proving that a sculpture might display rather uninhibited emotion. And a painting whose one side is, say, abstract and another is representational would prove, were it not cliched, that brains can still appreciate such a piece aesthetically even in spite of stylistic 'incongruity'. And so on, and so on, and so on. Basically, it means 'it works even though something crucial has been changed'.
>>24702163
>>24702001
And yes, parodies such as yours would work too, except they fail (1), namely own aesthetic contribution (making the very linear/planar/spatial composition, in terms of angles and colour and light and shadow and balance and directions of lines just more pleasant, more poignant to see).
>>24702163
>>24702242
In other words, 'conceptual novelty' is basically the degree to which something can be abused so to still be recognized. Let me Google >famous art and go trough examples. 'The Starry Night' managed to represent the pattern of wind through swirls. 'The Scream' represented an emotional state through the wavy lines again. 'Impression, Sunrise' represented, well, it used a different technique for everything, from waves to those things in the background to the boats being just single shapes. 'Girl with a Pearl Earring' represented the feeling of intimacy through directness of the stare contrasted with scarcity of areas of objects, I imagine, to a new degree. 'The Persistence of Memory', well, it represented the pattern of representation itself in a novel way, namely that metonymy (clocks -- time) is still representation.
I'm sure it works this way in music, too, and possibly dance and culinary arts as well.
Art is basically about pattern recognition.
>>24701845
>>24702163
>>24702807
Also, I consciously omitted emotional impact in the definitions. Shock value, evoking a mere sense of grandeur, or pity... as soon as it's not novel, it is just, well, artisanry, not art. It is worth exactly as much as faithful representation: it just solidly manages to produce a fixed effect.
